a mixed methods study: evaluating the relationship of
TRANSCRIPT
Purdue UniversityPurdue e-Pubs
Open Access Theses Theses and Dissertations
12-2016
A mixed methods study: Evaluating therelationship of project manager competencies andit project management methodologiesKeith A. McDermottPurdue University
Follow this and additional works at: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/open_access_theses
Part of the Business Administration, Management, and Operations Commons, ComputerSciences Commons, and the Management Sciences and Quantitative Methods Commons
This document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries. Please contact [email protected] foradditional information.
Recommended CitationMcDermott, Keith A., "A mixed methods study: Evaluating the relationship of project manager competencies and it projectmanagement methodologies" (2016). Open Access Theses. 876.https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/open_access_theses/876
A MIXED METHODS STUDY: EVALUATING THE RELATIONSHIP OF
PROJECT MANAGER COMPETENCIES AND IT PROJECT MANAGEMENT
METHODOLOGIES
by
Keith A. McDermott
A Thesis
Submitted to the Faculty of Purdue University
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of
Master of Science
Department of Computer and Information Technology
West Lafayette, Indiana
December 2016
ii
THE PURDUE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL
STATEMENT OF THESIS APPROVAL
Jeffrey Brewer, Chair
Department of Computer and Information Technology
Kevin Dittman
Department of Computer and Information Technology
Dr. Linda Naimi
Department of Technology Leadership and Innovation
Approved by:
Prof. Jeffrey L. Whitten
Head of the Departmental Graduate Program
iii
This thesis is dedicated to my husband. Thank you for all of your support,
encouragement, and patience. I could not have accomplished this without you.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to acknowledge the guidance of my committee members. Your insights
have proven invaluable and I have learned more about the field thanks to your assistance.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ vii
LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... viii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................ ix
GLOSSARY ....................................................................................................................... x
ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... xi
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1
1.1 Scope ......................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Significance ............................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Statement of Purpose ................................................................................................. 2
1.4 Research Question ..................................................................................................... 3
1.5 Assumptions .............................................................................................................. 3
1.6 Limitations ................................................................................................................ 4
1.7 Delimitations ............................................................................................................. 4
1.8 Summary ................................................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER 2. REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE ............................................. 5
2.1 Project Manager Competencies ................................................................................. 5
2.2 Traditional and Agile Methodologies ....................................................................... 7
2.2.1 Waterfall Model ............................................................................................ 9
2.2.2 Scrum .......................................................................................................... 10
2.3 Agile Project Management ...................................................................................... 11
2.4 Data Gathering Methods ......................................................................................... 12
2.5 Summary ................................................................................................................. 13
CHAPTER 3. FRAMEWORK AND METHODOLOGY............................................. 14
3.1 Framework .............................................................................................................. 14
3.2 Sample ..................................................................................................................... 14
3.3 Data Sources ............................................................................................................ 14
3.4 Researcher Bias ....................................................................................................... 15
3.5 Tools and Analysis .................................................................................................. 15
3.6 Coding ..................................................................................................................... 16
vi
3.7 Generalizability ....................................................................................................... 16
3.8 Summary ................................................................................................................. 16
CHAPTER 4. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ....................................................... 17
4.1 Survey Instrument ................................................................................................... 17
4.1.1 Survey Distribution ..................................................................................... 17
4.1.2 Exclusion Criteria ........................................................................................ 18
4.1.3 Survey Layout ............................................................................................. 19
4.1.4 Respondent Demographics .......................................................................... 19
4.1.5 Leadership Development Questionnaire ..................................................... 23
4.1.6 Project Manager Competency Development (PMCD) ................................ 26
4.1.7 Additional Results ....................................................................................... 28
4.1.8 Survey Result Validation ............................................................................ 29
4.2 One-on-One Interviews ........................................................................................... 30
4.2.1 Interview Findings ....................................................................................... 30
4.2.2 Additional Interview Findings .................................................................... 32
4.3 Comparisons of Certifications ................................................................................. 33
4.4 Final Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 35
4.5 Future Research ....................................................................................................... 37
APPENDIX A. SURVEY ................................................................................................. 38
APPENDIX B. ONE-ON-ONE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS .......................................... 52
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 53
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1 LDQ Dimensions for traditional and agile project managers .......................... 24
Table 4.2 PMCD results for traditional and agile project managers ................................ 26
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1 Waterfall model developed by Winston Royce (1987) .................................... 9
Figure 2.2 Basic Scrum framework process flow ........................................................... 11
Figure 4.1 Respondent age distribution ........................................................................... 19
Figure 4.2 Years of IT Project Management experience per respondent age group ....... 20
Figure 4.3 Respondent Sectors ........................................................................................ 21
Figure 4.4 Certifications held by respondents ................................................................. 22
Figure 4.5 LDQ Results for traditional and agile project managers ................................ 25
Figure 4.6 PMCD results for traditional and agile project managers .............................. 27
Figure 4.7 Questionnaire responses confirmed positively .............................................. 29
ix
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
APM – Agile Project Management
ASQ – American Society of Quality
CSM – Certified Scrum Master
EQ – Emotional Quotient
IQ – Intelligence Quotient
IRB – Institutional Review Board
IT – Information Technology
ITaP – Information Technology at Purdue
ITIL – Information Technology Infrastructure Library
LDQ – Leadership Dimensions Questionnaire
MQ – Managerial Quotient
PM – Project Manager / Project Management
PMBOK – Project Management Body of Knowledge
PMCD – Project Manager Competency Development (Framework)
PMI – Project Management Institute
PMI-ACP – Project Management Institute – Agile Certified Practitioner
PMO – Project Management Office
PMP – Project Management Professional
RUP – Rational Unified Process
x
GLOSSARY
APM [Agile Project Management] – “is a collection of PMLC [Project Management Life
Cycle] models that can be used to manage projects whose goals are clearly
specified but whose solutions are not known at the outset of the project”
(Wysocki, 2013, p. 328).
competence – “A cluster of related knowledge, attitudes, skills, and other personal
characteristics that affects a major part of one’s job…, correlates with
performance on the job, can be measured against well-accepted standards, and can
be improved by means of training and development” (Project Management
Institute, 2007, p. 73)
life cycle – “A prescribed order of phases (smaller segments of an entire project) in
which the phases contain specific deliverables that collectively deliver a result”
(Brewer & Dittman, 2010, p. 523).
methodology – “a set of forms, guidelines, templates, and checklists that can be applied
to a specific project or situation” (Kerzner, 2013, p. 91).
PMO [Project Management Office] - “An organizational entity with full-time personnel
to provide a wide range of project management support and services across an
entire organization” (Brewer & Dittman, 2010, p. 525).
Scrum – “A framework within which people can address complex adaptive problems,
while productively and creatively delivering products of the highest possible
value” (Sutherland & Schwaber, 2013, p. 3).
waterfall model – “A traditional approach to systems development that describes a
development approach that is linear and sequential and that has distinct objectives
for each phase. In this model, the output of one phase is the input for the next”
(Brewer & Dittman, 2010, p. 529).
xi
ABSTRACT
Author: McDermott, Keith, A. MS
Institution: Purdue University
Degree Received: December 2016
Title: A Mixed Methods Study: Evaluating the Relationship of Project Manager
Competencies and IT Project Management Methodologies
Major Professor: Jeffrey Brewer.
Determining skillsets that are particularly important to the development of an effective
project manager can be useful for a variety of applications. These applications range
from the hiring of a new project manager for an organization to continued training for
current employees. Past research has called upon current project managers to rate what
skillsets they see as important to the cultivation of an optimal or effective project
manager. Additional research has expanded this idea to determine how skillsets vary
between project managers and functional managers (El-Sabaa, 2001). While this
research is certainly important, skillset grouping can be further explored. This thesis
explored the question of if certain skills are more heavily favored depending on the
project management methodology in-use by the target organization. This research looked
at a wide geographical subset of PMI Chapters in the United States and attempted to find
differences in project manager competencies and skills depending on the project
management certifications each respondent held. Through this data, the researcher was
able to find some interesting data related to the respondents and their expertise and
background. The research concludes by presenting final conclusions found in the data
and suggesting future research ideas.
1
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
This chapter begins with an introduction of the scope and significance of the
research. The research question and statement of purpose are then defined. The chapter
concludes by providing the boundaries of the study and defines key terms.
1.1 Scope
A key element in the success of a project manager is the possession of the correct
skills for the profession. While a large number of skills are useful in all activities with
which a project manager interacts, an overarching subset is most import. Determining
which skills are most important requires analysis.
When implementing a project, a project manager will apply a specific
methodology throughout the entire project lifecycle. In this research, commonly utilized
methodologies will be divided into either agile or traditional varieties. Due to the vastly
different implementation requirements of a methodology, certain skills can be more
important than others for an agile versus traditional methodology. This research will
determine what skills are most important for a project manager utilizing a given
methodology category.
1.2 Significance
Past research has looked at what skills are most desirable for a project manager to
possess. Understanding what skills are desirable or lead to higher project success rates
can allow a project manager to better hone their skills. Additionally, the hiring of new
project managers should focus on hiring candidates who demonstrate specifically desired
skills.
As an organization evolves and selects a project management methodology better
suited to their project types, the project manager should also evolve to better apply this
methodology. However, specific skills may be more important when applying an agile
methodology versus a traditional methodology, such as the waterfall methodology. As
2
methodologies evolve, they develop complex nuances that may require a higher level of
one skill that may have not been as important when applying a simpler methodology.
According to the 2014 State of Agile Survey (VersionOne, Inc., 2015), Agile
adoption by organizations is increasing year over year. Most notably, the data has shown
that an increasing number of respondents are working in large organizations
(VersionOne, Inc., 2015, p. 2):
But in 2014, approximately 35% of respondents had more than 5,000 people in
their organization, and 20% worked in very large organizations with more than
20,000 people.
In addition to sheer adoption rates, organizations are taking advantage of an
increasing number of the benefits which are realized by adoption of an agile
methodology. The Survey listed the top gains to organizations as three main benefits.
First, 87% of respondents stated an increased “ability to manage changing priorities”
(VersionOne, Inc., 2015, p. 2). Second, the productivity of the team was noted by 84%
of respondents. Finally, 82% of respondents noted that project visibility is a benefit.
Although past research has highlighted desired skills for project managers
(Brewer & Dittman, 2010; El-Sabaa, 2001; Fisher, 2011; Keil, Lee, & Deng, 2013;
Müller & Turner, 2010), there is little research that compares skills against the
methodologies in use. Without this knowledge, a project management office could hire a
project manager who has great potential, yet may not have the optimal skills to apply an
agile methodology. Identification of these specific skills can allow a project manager to
better focus their skills and be more efficient at utilizing their limited time and resources.
1.3 Statement of Purpose
Determining skillsets that are particularly important to the development of an
effective project manager can be useful for a variety of applications. These applications
range from the hiring of a new project manager for an organization to continued training
for current employees. Past research has called upon current project managers to rate
what skillsets they see as important to the cultivation of an optimal or effective project
manager. Additional research has expanded this idea to determine how skillsets vary
3
between project managers and functional managers (El-Sabaa, 2001). While this
research is certainly important, skillset grouping can be further explored.
This thesis will explore if certain skills are more heavily favored depending on the
project management methodology in-use by the target organization. Project management
methodologies have evolved over time. This project will divide the most common
methodologies into either traditional or agile methodologies. The goal of this research is
to determine if the skillsets required for an effective project manager vary in distribution
based on the methodology in use. Further, the results of this research will assist in
providing more targeted training to new and current project managers alike based on
what methodology is deployed in a given organization.
1.4 Research Question
How do suggested skillsets for project managers vary, if at all, when utilizing
agile versus traditional project management methodologies?
1.5 Assumptions
The following assumptions were inherent to the design of this study:
There is a need to determine skillsets and competencies relevant to project
managers who are implementing varied methodologies.
Survey respondents will have enough time to thoughtfully complete the survey
without rushing.
Individuals selected for interviews will be willing to participate.
Study participants will fully answer all questions.
Study participants will answer all questions truthfully.
Study participants will be sufficiently qualified to participate.
The number of respondents was adequate to allow this study to continue.
The survey tool, Qualtrics, will be fully available for the duration of the study.
4
1.6 Limitations
The following limitations were inherent to the design of this study:
The survey will be distributed to members of various Project Management
Institute (PMI) chapters in the United States.
Project Managers who are in a target PMI chapter area, yet not a member of that
chapter, will not be included in the survey distribution.
Of the successful survey respondents, a limited number will be willing to
participate in a follow-up interview phase.
1.7 Delimitations
The following delimitations were inherent to the design of this study:
The survey and following interviews will be conducted over a limited amount of
time with an expiration date.
The survey and following interviews will not be comparing Project Managers to
any other job title.
1.8 Summary
This chapter introduced the research by describing the scope and significance.
Next, the chapter addressed the assumptions, limitations, and delimitations of the
research. Finally, a list of key terms was provided.
5
CHAPTER 2. REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE
Project managers must possess a base set of competencies across a range of
associated skills. These can include both hard skills and soft skills. However, what skills
are best desired and in what order? Additionally, do skills and competencies vary based
on the type of project, industry, or methodology in-use? A thorough analysis of past
research will reveal important insights and also look at areas where this research can be
further improved.
2.1 Project Manager Competencies
As a project manager, understanding what competencies are most desirable for
project success can help guide and cultivate a project manager as well as assist in finding
appropriate training opportunities. While much research agrees, Gillard (2009)
determined that soft skills are more important than hard skills. Soft skills encompass a
range of competencies, but can be thought of as people-skills. This can include
interpersonal communication and conflict management among others. However, hard
skills can be seen as the more technical skills. While this traditionally may be thought of
solely as technical skills such as programming or deep systems thinking, hard skills can
also include knowledge of project management processes. An example of a project
management process would be a deep understanding of the process groups of the ten
knowledge areas of the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) (Project
Management Institute, 2013).
Delving deeper into how leadership skills are desired in a project manager, other
research (Müller & Turner, 2010) has found that leadership styles vary based on the
complexity of a project. Projects that are found to be more complex require leadership
styles that are more transformational. Transformational, in this sense, means that a
project manager had high scores in all dimensions of the Leadership Dimensions
Questionnaire (LDQ) utilized in the study. The LDQ will be further discussed later in
this literature review. As project complexity decreases, so do the number of dimensions
of the LDQ that a project manager must excel in.
6
Also found in much research was a variance in the number of participants in the
sample and their diversity. El-Sabaa (2001) utilized a convenience sample of Egyptian
Project Managers, but looked at a wide range of industries with a sample size of 85
project managers. The research results show that regardless of sector, human skills and
conceptual and organization skills are much more important than technical skills. Also,
project managers tend to have a much more varied career path with less longevity with a
given company than functional managers. Keil, Lee, and Deng (2013) utilized a much
smaller sample size of only 19 project managers from a single chapter of PMI (Project
Management Institute). However, their research looked at what skills were most desired
in the ideal project manager through several rounds of surveys as well as interviews. The
work of Keil, Lee, and Deng (2013) confirms the work of El-Sabaa (2001) to identify
people skills as among the highest desired skills of a Project Manager.
To create a baseline of which competencies and related skills are important to a
generic project manager, a framework for competencies is necessary. To fill this need,
PMI developed the Project Manager Competency Development (PMCD) Framework.
The PMCD was first published in 2002. At the time, the PMCD grouped competencies
by knowledge areas. In researching the second edition of the PMCD, PMI found that
grouping competencies by process area was a more logical grouping method. The second
edition of the PMCD was also updated to align with the third edition of the PMBOK.
This research utilizes the second revision of the PMCD. A third edition was in
development by PMI and was set to be released in late 2015, however no further
information about this revision was available by the completion of this research. The
third edition was to be updated to reflect updates in the field and to align with the fifth
edition of the PMBOK.
The PMCD Framework categorizes project manager competencies into one of
three core areas (Project Management Institute, 2007). Knowledge competencies look at
what the project manager has learned about project management related to the PMBOK.
Performance competencies relate to how well the project manager can apply the
processes and procedures related to the PMBOK. Personal competencies instead define
how one actually manages a project. The PMCD defines six units of personal
7
competencies: communicating, leading, managing, cognitive ability, effectiveness, and
professionalism. While all are important, this research will focus primarily on the
communicating and managing competencies.
According to the PMCD, a project manager who is competent in communicating
“effectively exchanges accurate, appropriate and relevant information with stakeholders
using suitable methods” (Project Management Institute, 2007, p. 26). Various
performance criteria are defined by the PMCD including proactively engaging
stakeholders, active listening, maintaining both formal and informal communication, and
providing accurate and fact-based information. A total of 12 performance criteria were
organized into four competency elements.
In addition to competencies related to communicating, managing competencies
were chosen for this research. The PMCD defines the ideal project manager as one who
“effectively administers the project through appropriate deployment and use of human,
financial, material, intellectual, and intangible resources” (Project Management Institute,
2007, p. 30). The PMCD lists 12 performance criteria relating to three competency
elements of conflict resolution, project team recruitment and development, and ensuring
project success.
2.2 Traditional and Agile Methodologies
Traditional systems development methodologies have been in use since the
beginning of systems and software development. In the beginning, these were as basic as
just flow charts with added documentation to facilitate management needs. As time
evolved, the waterfall systems development methodology was developed. Once system
complexity began increasing further, the waterfall methodology advanced to become
rapid development waterfall followed by staged delivery waterfall methodology. These
took the linear waterfall methodology and added iterative and incremental components
(Wysocki, 2013).
The traditional waterfall methodology is considered a heavy process. This is
because waterfall is plan-driven and relies upon continuously improving processes and
procedures. While not all processes contained in the PMBOK must be applied to each
project, the basic framework should be applied to help guide the project toward a
8
successful outcome. Without following the basic framework, a waterfall-based project
can quickly fall out of scope, or run over the allocated schedule or budget. While these
processes provide much job security for the project manager, they also could burden the
development team with un-necessary overhead.
As the systems development field has advanced, the waterfall methodology has
become less practical for complex projects. Customer involvement was very low except
at only the most major milestones which frequently caused major changes to the project
scope. Agile systems development methodologies grew out of the need to correct these
issues with traditional methodologies.
Agile methodologies have been around for a number of years. Takeuchi and
Nonaka (1986) described the guiding principles surrounding many agile methodologies in
their article “The new product development game.” However, as agile is becoming more
mainstream, project managers are looking at how the project manager role fits into the
various agile methodology frameworks. Agile teams want to focus more on the output of
the project than on the documentation and processes (Boehm & Turner, 2004). Much of
the mentality behind agile teams and agile software development is contained in a
document called the “Manifesto for Agile Software Development” (Beck et al., 2001, ¶ 1-
3):
We are uncovering better ways of developing software by doing it and
helping others do it. Through this work we have come to value:
Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
Working software over comprehensive documentation
Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
Responding to change over following a plan
That is, while there is value in the items on the right, we value the items
on the left more.
The Manifesto was developed by a group of 17 software developers. In addition
to creating the Manifesto, 12 principles expand on what it means to be an agile developer.
These principles reiterate that an agile developer focuses on pleasing the customer by
producing deliverable iterations in short timespans. Agile developers reject rigid
processes, unnecessary documentation, and complexity. Several agile methodologies
9
exist including Scrum and XP (eXtreme Programming). In each of these, various roles
are defined for the participants of a project.
2.2.1 Waterfall Model
The traditional waterfall model was first described in the paper “Managing The
Development of Large Software Systems” by Winston Royce (1987). Royce’s paper,
first published in 1970, describes how many customers and developers alike would prefer
the software development models to only include an analysis phase and a coding phase.
In order to ensure a successful product is created, additional steps are required to create
the classic waterfall model. These additional steps include system and software
requirements, program design, testing, and operations. Royce also believed in heavy
documentation. Consequently, documentation is a required output of nearly every step.
Figure 2.1 Waterfall model developed by Winston Royce (1987)
As can be seen by the previous figure, the waterfall model is able to show a clear
path from product inception to delivering the final product. This model is considered a
heavy model as there is a large amount of managerial oversight and documentation.
Additionally, the model is rigid and lacks the ability to adapt to almost any change in
requirements. Lastly, the model has minimal involvement with the customer throughout
the course of development. Due to this lack of involvement, the customer may have little
System
Requirements
Software
Requirements
Analysis
Program
Design
Coding
Testing
Operations
10
use of the final product or may require substantial changes to comply with ever-changing
business objectives.
2.2.2 Scrum
To better adapt to changing customer requirements, improve customer feedback
throughout the development process, and allow organizations to more quickly adapt to
change, a new paradigm of software development was required. Scrum, one such
framework for agile software development, has enjoyed continuous success as the top
agile software development methodology (VersionOne, Inc., 2015). According to
research by VersionOne (2015), Scrum was used by 56% of respondents. The next
highest used methodology found was a Scrum/XP hybrid and was used by 10% of
respondents. Looking back to a 2010 survey by VersionOne, 58% of respondents were
following Scrum with 17% following a Scrum/XP hybrid (VersionOne, Inc., 2010).
Scrum is a highly customer-driven software development framework. In a Scrum
team, work is completed in month long iterations, or sprints. Each sprint begins with a
planning meeting. During this meeting, the overall sprint goals are determined and the
work to be performed is added to the sprint backlog. As development progresses during
the sprint, work is completed from the backlog. After a sprint has completed, items
remaining in the backlog may be transferred to subsequent sprints, or the functionality
may be removed from the backlog. The basic framework of Scrum can be visualized
using the following figure.
11
Figure 2.2 Basic Scrum framework process flow
Unlike other software development frameworks, the customer, or product owner,
is involved in a Scrum project throughout and is constantly presented with demos of
output from the current sprint (Wysocki, 2013). Additionally, the product owner works
collaboratively with the development team to determine if the current sprint output
satisfies their requirements as the final product version.
Scrum describes three main roles: Scrum Master, Product Owner, and the Team
(Chickering, 2013). The Product Owner role can be directly transferred to the traditional
project role of the key project stakeholder. The Scrum Master is described as a role that
removes barriers the Team is experiencing and to be the central point of communication
between everyone involved. Additionally, the Scrum Master strives to ensure the Team
is working as efficiently as possible. In many ways this is a direct translation of the role
of a traditional project manager. Chickering (2013) agrees by pointing out that many
skills of a project manager are relevant to the Scrum Master role.
2.3 Agile Project Management
After examining agile developer goals for projects, how do these goals align with
those of a project manager? The project manager’s goals are primarily focused on
ensuring the classic triple constraint is well managed. The triple constraint keys in on the
30 days
24 hours
Product Backlog
Sprint
Backlog Sprint Working
Product
Increment
12
time, cost, and scope of a project (Brewer & Dittman, 2010). When these key metrics are
well managed, the project has a greater chance of success. As an agile software
development team is more focused on generating iterations of a project in a short time
frame, the project manager can step in to ensure that the team is on-track. The project
manager can also reduce the administrative overhead encountered by software developers
utilizing less agile methodologies. By freeing the team to do what they do best, the
project manager can simultaneously focus on relevant documentation of processes.
2.4 Data Gathering Methods
While much research has analyzed what skills are important to project managers
from various research vectors, equally important is how the data was gathered. Although
some researchers have used custom-designed surveys with follow-up interview processes,
the use of a Leadership Dimensions Questionnaire (LDQ) has emerged as a standard
survey tool (Geoghegan & Dulewicz, 2008; Müller & Turner, 2010).
The LDQ was developed by Dulewicz and Higgs (2005). The LDQ explores
several dimensions of leadership and divides them into three main dimensions: emotional
and social dimensions, intellectual dimensions, and managerial dimensions. Each
dimension encompasses several competencies.
The emotional and social dimensions rate a respondent’s self-awareness,
emotional resilience, intuitiveness, interpersonal sensitivity, influence, motivation, and
conscientiousness. These dimensions can be summed as the soft skills of the project
manager. The skills focus around the people in a team and how to best manage their
needs and individuality.
Critical analysis, vision, and strategic perspective are all intellectual dimensions.
These can be best thought of as the how the project manager can cope with change and
overcoming obstacles during the lifecycle of a project. With sound vision and a well-
honed ability to think strategically, a project manager can devise creative solutions to
issues as they arise.
Finally, resource management, creating engaging communication, and
empowering, developing, and achieving are all managerial dimensions. Rightly so, these
dimensions can be best described as the base of the leadership style of the project
13
manager. When a manager, regardless of whether they are a project manager, is able to
develop engaging communication and empower their team members to better themselves,
the team can achieve great results.
Dulewicz and Higgs (2005) continue their research by building three profiles of
leadership styles: goal oriented, engaging, and involving. As was referenced by Müller
and Turner (2010), an individual who encompasses all of the 15 leadership dimensions
will exhibit strong traits of all three styles. An individual who would be classified as
having a somewhat lesser score of the dimensions would be a bit less goal oriented but
still almost as engaging and involving. An individual with a low score on the LDQ could
not be properly fit to a leadership style due to insufficient data in the study.
2.5 Summary
This chapter provided a summary of literature on the research area of project
management competencies and project management methodologies. Past research into
which skills are highest ranked provides a method to shape this research as well as future
research into this topic. However, the literature review expanded on deficiencies in past
research by beginning to look into the components of several popular methodologies.
Finally, a brief background on the Leadership Dimensions Questionnaire was provided.
14
CHAPTER 3. FRAMEWORK AND METHODOLOGY
This chapter defines the framework for the study into project manager
competencies and project management methodologies. This chapter also defines the data
sources used, the sample, and how the data was normalized.
3.1 Framework
This chapter defines the framework for the study into project manager
competencies and project management methodologies. This chapter also defines the data
sources used, the sample, and how the data was normalized.
3.2 Sample
The original sample of this study was intended to be members of a PMI chapter
geographically close to Purdue University. During the data gathering phase of the study,
the sample was changed to include a number of PMI (Project Management Institute)
chapters from across the United States. The total population size of the survey
distribution is not known due to how PMI chapters were contacted for survey
distribution. This will be discussed further in Chapter 4 of this research. However, a
roughly 5 - 10% response rate to the study survey was expected. It was further expected
that the survey respondents would span a range of industries, but would focus on IT-
based project managers.
Interviews of a subset of survey respondents were utilized as well. Due to a low
response rate by potential interviewees, only two one-on-one interviews were conducted.
The insights gained from these responses are discussed in Chapter 4 of this research.
3.3 Data Sources
The data sources for this study began with a survey distributed to the sample
group. The survey questions primarily utilized a Likert Scale; however, the survey also
featured questions utilizing a sliding scale to indicate percentages and some open-ended
15
questions as well. In addition, broad demographics were obtained through survey
questions. Survey respondents must have managed either agile or non-agile for responses
to be relevant to this study.
The survey was piloted to a group of project managers located in Purdue
University’s central IT group – ITaP (Information Technology at Purdue). The results of
the pilot allowed the survey questions to be refined for the target sample group.
A subset of the survey responses opted into follow-up one-on-one interviews.
These interviews allowed a deeper discussion on their responses and the ability to gain
further insights. Survey and interview responses were anonymized for publication.
Lastly, document analysis was performed to compare certification documents for
agile project management certifications versus more generic project management
certifications. Using these three data sources, triangulation will be obtained.
3.4 Researcher Bias
As researcher bias is possible in the formation of survey questions, all reasonable
means were taken to reduce the likelihood of skewed survey responses due to survey
design. The researcher gathered input from committee members to review all survey
questions as well as input provided by the IRB.
The researcher has worked in a variety of information technology roles for over
ten years. This experience was used to provide proper framing of the survey and
interview questions to the information technology sector.
3.5 Tools and Analysis
This study utilized a mixed-methods methodology. This was achieved through
the quantitative analysis of survey responses which utilized a Likert scale to begin to
determine a correlation between project manager methodologies and competencies.
Additionally, a qualitative analysis of open-ended survey and interview question
responses was performed.
16
A software analysis package was originally to be used, but was deemed
unnecessary due to a low interview response rate. Instead, non-quantitative data, such as
interview responses, was analyzed by grouping like items together.
The survey was distributed using Qualtrics – a popular survey management
platform. The platform supports a variety of question types and easy exporting of all
survey data for further analysis. Microsoft Excel was used to analyze the data obtained
from Qualtrics.
3.6 Coding
In the analysis of survey responses, coding was necessary. Coding looks at open-
ended survey question responses and analyze which keywords occur most-often between
respondents. By utilizing this method, a researcher bias in the analysis of such questions
was avoided.
3.7 Generalizability
This study may have a limited generalizability due to the chosen sample. The
sample was limited to PMI chapters where the PMI PMP certification was the primary
project management certification held. Additionally, although a wide geographical range
of the United States participated in the survey, the results may not be applicable to the
remainder of the United States or another country.
3.8 Summary
This chapter provided an overview of the research framework and methodology.
The data sources and sample group were defined. Additionally, the chapter defined how
the data was normalized to provide consistent and reliable results.
17
CHAPTER 4. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
This chapter will discuss the results of the survey as well as insights gained from
the individual interviews conducted and the certification document analysis. Finally,
conclusions will be drawn from the data obtained and provide suggestions for future
research on this topic.
4.1 Survey Instrument
This section describes specifics of the survey instrument and its distribution.
Information regarding the survey audience is then provided. Finally, analysis is given on
the data obtained from the survey instrument.
4.1.1 Survey Distribution
This study initially was to be distributed to the members of a specific PMI
(Project Management Institute) chapter geographically close to the researcher’s location.
However, after encountering barriers to distribution, all PMI chapters in the United States
were queried regarding their willingness to assist with the survey distribution.
In total, 143 PMI chapters were listed on the PMI website as of June 2016 when
the survey distribution was assessed. The researcher visited the site listed for each PMI
chapter and gathered data on how to best contact each individually. Five PMI Chapters
were not contacted due to website issues with their contact forms. One chapter was also
not contacted due to the primary language of the chapter not being English. The target
audience for the survey, due to limitations of the researcher, had to be primarily English
speaking. With the previously listed exclusions, 137 chapters were individually
contacted regarding their willingness to distribute the survey instrument for this research.
Four total PMI chapters positively replied their consent to distribute the survey
instrument to their chapter members in a variety of forms. These distribution methods
ranged from a post announcing the survey on the chapter website, to announcements on
slide decks at chapter meetings, to direct emails to chapter members by chapter
communication directors. The researcher, by analyzing the locations of some survey
18
responses, also assumes that there may be more chapters that distributed the survey
without providing a positive response.
The survey respondents span a wide geographical range of the United States.
PMI chapters which confirmed distribution to their members include chapters from New
Jersey, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Hawaii. Survey responses were also gained from other
regions of the United states, although in smaller numbers.
4.1.2 Exclusion Criteria
The survey concluded with a total of 88 partial and complete responses. Of these,
72 respondents completed the entire survey and these responses are being used for all
portions of data analysis. Another eight partially-completed survey responses are being
included for analysis in applicable portions. Finally, eight survey responses are being
excluded completely.
Eight survey responses are being included in the data analysis despite not being
fully completed. Three responses are being included in the demographics portion of data
analysis. However, these three respondents did not complete any further sections of the
survey. One respondent had completed all sections of the survey but did not complete the
last page of the survey. The last page of the survey simply asks for additional comments
and allows the respondent to fully complete the survey. One respondent completed most
sections of the survey except for sections asking about the Project Manager Competency
Development (PMCD) Framework and control questions. Finally, another three
responses are being included, but had only completed the demographics and Leadership
Dimensions Questionnaire (LDQ) sections of the survey. Despite the above constraints
on these eight partially completed responses, they are still able to give valuable
informative for the completed sections.
Eight total survey responses are being excluded in their entirety from the survey
data for the following reasons. Three responses were excluded as they were test
responses by the researcher over the course of the active survey. Five responses were
excluded as the respondents had accepted the consent form but did not complete any
other portions of the survey.
19
4.1.3 Survey Layout
The survey began by asking basic demographics and respondent background
which are being aggregately reported to protect anonymity. Several questions were then
asked to have respondents rate themselves on components of the LDQ. The survey then
asked respondents about the projects they had managed in the past. Finally, respondents
were asked to rate themselves against a selection of components of the PMCD (Project
Manager Competency Development) Framework (version 2). After the survey
respondents were invited to participate in one-on-one interviews to gain further insights
into their responses. The full survey is provided in Appendix A at the end of this thesis.
4.1.4 Respondent Demographics
Looking at demographics, while the majority of respondents were male (64%),
34% were female with 2% providing no response. The majority of respondents were
aged between 35-64 years old with fairly even distribution between the three age ranges
defined of 35-55, 45-54, and 55-64. There were a small number of respondents in the age
range of 25-34 and a smaller number who were 65 or over.
Figure 4.1 Respondent age distribution
0 06
23 2225
4
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Less than 19 20 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or over
Res
po
nd
ent
Co
un
t
Age Ranges
20
Respondents’ experience with IT project management ranged anywhere from zero
to 35 years. Looking at individual responses, years of project management experience
does not directly relate to the age of the respondent. While a respondent who is in the 24-
35 age range obviously cannot have 20 or more years of project management experience,
a respondent who is 65 or older may have had project management experience less than
five years in length.
It is important to provide a disclaimer on IT project management experience held
by respondents. The survey question was worded: “Please enter how many years of IT
Project Management experience you have?” As such, some responses may include
experience in project management in general due to confusion over wording. The
researcher could have worded the question better to eliminate this ambiguity and
confusion.
Figure 4.2 Years of IT Project Management experience per respondent age group
The preceding graph visualizes the project management experience of each
respondent relative to the age grouping of the respondents. By combining both the
project management experience data and the age grouping data, we can see that while the
1
8 7 7
22
6
3 2
2
8
7
1
1
1
5
8
7
2
5
10
15
20
25
30
25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or over
Res
po
nd
ent
Co
un
t
Age Grouping
0 Years ITPM 1 to 5 Years ITPM 6 to 15 Years ITPM 16 to 25 Years ITPM 26 to 35 Years ITPM
21
experience with IT project management does increase with age, those who are younger
have a relatively equal amount of experience with IT project management than their older
counterparts. This could be attributed to younger generations having greater exposure at
earlier stages of their lives with more integrated technology than older generations.
Respondent experience with IT project management methodologies does not become
more pronounced until the 55 to 64 and 65 or over age ranges.
Respondents represented a diverse range of industries. While 44 of the 79
respondents who completed this question choose an industry sector they worked on
which was listed on the survey, 35 respondents listed a different sector. The majority of
respondents indicated they work in Technology (20 respondents) with Utilities as the
second highest sector with 9 respondents. The proceeding chart shows the number of
respondents for each sector specified in the survey results.
Figure 4.3 Respondent Sectors
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Technology
Utilities
Healthcare
Government
Education
Defense
Oil and Gas
Finance
Engineering
Construction
Transportation
Retail
Many sectors
Manufacturing
Consulting
Chemical
Network
Marketing
Insurance
Consumer Electronics
Agriculture
Number of Respondents
Sect
or
22
Respondent certifications where mainly centered around the Project Management
Professional certification from PMI. This result was expected as the survey was
distributed to PMI chapters. However, while it was expected for a subset of respondents
to have an Agile certification, the actual results here were surprising to the researcher.
PMI released the first revision of their Agile certification, the PMI-ACP (Project
Management Institute Agile Certified Practitioner) in 2011. Despite this, no respondents
held this certification. Instead, the majority of respondents who indicated they held an
Agile-related certification were Certified Scrum Masters (CSM). The CSM certification
focuses on a specific Agile methodology whereas the PMI-ACP can be related to many
Agile methodologies. The PMI-ACP touches on several Agile methodologies such as
Scrum, Kanban, and others. The figure below highlights the distribution of certifications
of the respondents. It is important to note that respondents were able to select more than
one certification as it is possible to hold more than one at any given time.
Figure 4.4 Certifications held by respondents
Agile certifications, for the context of this research, are defined as being one of
the following – SAFe, IC Agile, or a Certified Scrum Master (CSM) certification. One
respondent held the SAFe (Scaled Agile Framework) Practitioner certification, while one
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
PMP (PMI - Project Management Professional)
Other
Six Sigma
CSM (Certified SCRUM Master)
SAFe SP
PMOC (Project Management Office Certification)
IC Agile Cert
Respondent Count
Cer
tifi
cati
on
23
other held an IC Agile certification. However, seven respondents held the CSM
certification making it the most popular agile certification listed. Despite this popularity,
only eight total respondents (or 10% of the total respondents), held one or more agile
certification. Traditional project management certifications are limited to the PMP
(Project Management Professional). 65 respondents held the PMP certification.
For the remainder of the respondents, eight had no listed certifications. Seven
respondents held six-sigma certifications, however this is a process-improvement
certification so is being excluded. Also, several respondents held certifications which,
while useful in IT careers, are not being classified here as a traditional or agile project
management certification. These include certifications from the American Society for
Quality (ASQ) and ITIL certifications. ITIL (Information Technology Infrastructure
Library) is more related to IT service management than IT project management.
4.1.5 Leadership Development Questionnaire
After querying the respondents on demographics, respondents were asked to rate
themselves, using a Likert Scale, on components of the Leadership Development
Questionnaire (LDQ). The LDQ, as described in the literature review, rates respondents
on three main groupings – EQ (Emotional and Social Quotient), IQ (Intellectual
Quotient), and MQ (Managerial Quotient). The survey asked respondents each sub
component of the LDQ to provide a total of 15 LDQ dimensions. Table 4.1 shows these
results for the seven respondents who held agile project management certifications and
the sixty-four respondents who held traditional project management certifications.
Table 4.1 provides the mean and standard deviation data twice. First (as the
numerator), the data is shown for respondents who were classified as having a traditional
project manager certification. Second (as the denominator), data is shown for those who
held an Agile project management certification. By seeing both sets of data together, we
are able to attempt to draw conclusions from this data.
24
Table 4.1 LDQ Dimensions for traditional and agile project managers
IQ (Intellectual Quotient) Mean Standard Deviation
(IQ1) Critical analysis and judgement 4.5 / 4.00 0.53 / 0.00
(IQ2) Vision and Imagination 4.31 / 4.00 0.66 / 0.58
(IQ3) Strategic perspective 4.20 / 3.71 0.72 / 1.11
MQ (Managerial Quotient) Mean Standard Deviation
(MQ1) Resource management 4.11 / 3.86 0.69 / 0.69
(MQ2) Engaging Communication 4.42 / 4.43 0.64 / 0.53
(MQ3) Empowering 4.03 / 4.00 0.85 / 0.58
(MQ4) Developing 4.14 / 4.43 0.81 / 0.53
(MQ5) Achieving 4.05 / 4.29 0.76 / 0.76
EQ (Emotional Quotient) Mean Standard Deviation
(EQ1) Self-awareness 4.16 / 4.14 0.62 / 0.69
(EQ2) Emotional resilience 4.17 / 4.14 0.77 / 0.69
(EQ3) Intuitiveness 4.13 / 4.29 0.75 / 0.49
(EQ4) Interpersonal sensitivity 4.23 / 4.29 0.75 / 0.76
(EQ5) Influence 3.86 / 3.86 0.83 / 0.90
(EQ6) Motivation 4.30 / 4.29 0.73 / 0.49
(EQ7) Conscientiousness 4.56 / 4.43 0.61 / 0.53
The data on the next page is a visualization of traditional versus agile survey
respondents. By visualizing the data, the results of the raw data from Table 4.1 become
more clear. While the results show some interesting results, they are not statistically
significant. The peaks of each result for traditional and agile are within the standard
deviation for the other result.
25
Figure 4.5 LDQ Results for traditional and agile project managers
We can see that while most of the dimensions of the LDQ are nearly identical for
both traditional and agile PMs, there are differences in the IQ dimensions favoring the
traditional PMs. These differences can allow us to infer that perhaps LDQ IQ dimensions
are more important for traditional project managers than agile project managers. One
possible reason for this is that the iterative process of agile may allow for the details of a
project to emerge more over time versus how much of a project must be worked out
completely during the planning phase for a traditional project. Traditional projects are
able to handle changes, but not as fluidly and with more potential consequences or delays
than during the execution of agile project management methodologies. As such, project
managers need to attempt, with the team’s help, to remove more potential issues and
better define the entire project scope in the planning stages more so with traditional
methodologies than with agile methodologies.
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
IQ1 IQ2 IQ3 MQ1 MQ2 MQ3 MQ4 MQ5 EQ1 EQ2 EQ3 EQ4 EQ5 EQ6 EQ7
Like
rt S
core
LDQ Dimension
Traditional PM Agile PM
26
4.1.6 Project Manager Competency Development (PMCD)
The Project Manager Competency Development (PMCD) Framework (version 2)
was also utilized in the survey. Respondents were asked to rate themselves on a Likert
Scale against a small subset of all PMCD components. Table 4.2, below, shows us the
results of the survey for the 5 respondents who held agile project management
certifications and the sixty-one respondents who held traditional project management
certifications.
As with the LDQ results, results from respondents who held traditional project
management certifications are shown in the numerator for the mean and standard
deviation. Results from respondents who held agile project management certifications
are shown in the denominator.
Table 4.2 PMCD results for traditional and agile project managers
Communicating Mean Standard
Deviation
(C1) Actively listens, understands, and
responds to stakeholders
4.36 / 4.80 0.66 / 0.45
(C2) Maintains lines of communication 4.39 / 4.80 0.74 / 0.45
(C3) Ensures quality of information 4.39 / 4.40 0.67 / 0.55
(C4) Tailors communication to
audience
4.30 / 4.40 0.74 / 0.89
Managing Mean Standard
Deviation
(M1) Builds and maintains the project
team
4.05 / 4.20 0.80 / 0.45
(M2) Plans and manages for project
success in an organized manner
4.15 / 4.20 0.70 / 0.84
(M3) Resolves conflict involving
project team or stakeholders
3.95 / 4.40 0.85 / 0.55
The data in Table 4.2 shows us that respondents who hold Agile project
management certifications rated themselves higher on most components of the PMCD
27
selected for this study. However, while the values are indeed higher, they are not
statistically significant.
Figure 4.6 PMCD results for traditional and agile project managers
The chart above shows the data in a more visual format. What this shows us is
that respondents who hold agile certifications may have higher or more developed skills
related to communicating and managing a project than respondents who do not hold agile
certifications. The three most prominent PMCD components are C1 (Actively listens,
understands, and responds to stakeholders), C2 (Maintains lines of communication), and
M3 (Resolves conflict involving project team or stakeholders).
While the results are again not statistically significant, we can see that Agile PMs
seem to have high scores on most of the PMCD qualities selected for this study.
Thinking about agile certifications and methodologies, these results may make logical
sense. In the case of Scrum, the Scrum Master is in constant communication with the
Scrum team with daily stand-up meetings, and continuous iterations of the project
progression. As such, communication with the project team may be more integral with
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
C1 C2 C3 C4 M1 M2 M3
Like
rt S
core
PMCD Component
Traditional PM Agile PM
28
agile methodologies than with traditional. As well, while conflict management and
resolution is certainly important for all projects regardless of methodology, mitigating
conflict early can help ensure an agile team, such as a Scrum team, stays focused on the
current sprint, which can help ensure future sprints are also able to be delivered on-time.
4.1.7 Additional Results
Three additional survey questions were posed to the survey respondents to assist
in gaining further insights into what types of projects they work on, and how successful
those projects may have been.
The first question asked respondents to categorize the projects they have worked
on depending on the project management methodology in use. The provided categories
were: Traditional (Waterfall), Agile (RUP, Scrum, etc.), and finally Hybrid (Adaptive
Project Framework, INSPIRE, etc.). 74.5% of respondents indicated that they manage
projects using traditional project management methodologies. Agile methodologies
accounted for 24.7% of responses, while hybrid methodologies accounted for 20.9% of
responses. Due to browser incompatibilities with the survey instrument, respondent
responses could have gone beyond 100% total between the three categories.
The second question asked to respondents was to categorize the projects they have
worked on by project size. The provided categories were: Small (duration of less than six
months), medium (duration of six to twelve months), and large projects (duration of
twelve or more months). The majority of respondents here, 51.8%, answered that their
projects were large projects. 37.3% of respondents stated they work on small projects
with 31.9% having worked on medium-size projects. Again, due to browser
incompatibilities with the survey instrument, respondent responses could have gone
beyond 100% total between the three categories.
Finally, a question was asked to have respondents classify their project success in
one of two ways. First, how many projects were considered a success by meeting the
originally defined scope, time, and cost constraints? These constraints are commonly
referred to as the triple-constraint or the Iron Triangle. 71.9% of respondents indicated
their projects met all three triple constraints. Second, how many projects were
considered a success by the customer despite not meeting one or more scope, time, or
29
cost constraint? 74% of respondents indicated their projects were still defined a success
by the customer regardless of the triple constraint. Despite how close these two values
were, the raw data itself showed a very wide variety of responses. Some respondents
indicated that their projects only met the triple constraint as little as 10% of the time
despite being declared a success by the customer 90% of the time. Conversely, some
respondents indicated their projects were defined a success by customers as little as 3%
despite being declared a success by the triple constraint 97% of the time.
4.1.8 Survey Result Validation
The last section of the survey consisted of five control questions. These five
questions re-iterated previously asked questions in order to validate that the responses
given were consistent. However, analyzing the data shows that a large number of
respondents did not answer questions consistently. The following chart shows the
percentage of control questions that were answered the same as their originally stated
version.
Figure 4.7 Questionnaire responses confirmed positively
0 5 10 15 20 25
100
80
60
40
20
0
UnfinishedSurvey
Response Counts Positively Confirmed
Per
cen
t C
on
firm
ed
30
The results of the control questions show that although valuable data was
obtained, respondent responses were not necessarily consistent through the course of the
entire survey. This may be due to other obligations while respondents were taking the
survey, or potentially different views after having thought about questions further.
4.2 One-on-One Interviews
After respondents had completed the survey, they were offered to opt-in to a
follow-up interview. The interviews were conducted over the phone to gain further
insights into some of the responses provided during the survey. The surveys were
recorded using Google Voice and then manually transcribed by the researcher for
analysis.
A relatively small response rate was projected as the interviewees would be a
subset of those who had actually completed the survey itself. In total, nine survey
respondents opted into the phone interview portion of the study. However, of those nine
survey respondents, only two actually replied to an email consenting to participate in the
interview phase of the study. The questions asked of the interviewees is provided in
Appendix B, at the end of this thesis.
Due to the low response rate of consent for the interview section of the study, the
results are not able to provide statistical significance to back up the survey results.
Despite this fact, the interviews were still able to provide a few perspectives on how
competencies and skills come into play when project managers manage projects utilizing
both traditional and agile project management methodologies.
The two interviewees consisted of both genders, different age ranges, and
different industries. Both interviewees represent the East Coast of the United States.
These diverse demographics help to add value to the responses which were received.
4.2.1 Interview Findings
While the interviews were low in number, the responses are still valued and can
tell us much. One respondent discussed about the shift from a technical role to a project
management role and the difficulties in that transition. Another talked about the shift in
project management over their years of experience. Both provided insights into how their
31
personalities and skills helped ensure success in the projects that they managed, along
with some problems encountered along the way.
Both interviewees held a PMP certification, although each held a different second
certification. One was a Certified Scrum Master while the other had a Six Sigma
certification. As well, both interviewees had managed both traditional and agile projects
during their career. The interviewees both started their careers in non-project
management technical roles and shifted over to becoming project managers after having
worked as project team members.
The interviews provided the opportunity to ask each person about their skills and
what they think contributes to their individual success as a project manager. Interviewees
were first asked what contributed to their success in managing traditional, or waterfall-
based, projects. An item which stood out is the ability to ensure the project team is aware
of what is required next and to ensure the team is acclimated to the repetition.
Consistency was also described as a useful skill. Consistency here refers to the ability to
be consistent in applying the methodology and ensuring the team is aware of what is
required and at what stage of the development process. Lastly, soft skills were an
important skill in order to communicate effectively with the team.
Despite the skills listed above which were helpful in managing traditional
projects, a few skills were identified which the interviewees felt were not as useful or
may have detracted from project success. One item is that project managers can try to
solve issues themselves. While project managers should solve some issues, mainly
related to items which the project team may not tasked for, such as budgeting, the project
team should be utilized to solve the technical issues at which they excel. Additionally,
impatience was identified as a potential detractor. The waterfall methodology especially
can take a long time before anything tangible is created. One interviewee described a
project in which a year had passed and the only tangible output was a completed project
charter.
After discussing traditional methodologies and related skills, interviewees were
asked to discuss the skills which helped or hindered their implementation of agile
methodologies. Two main concepts were discussed by the interviewees which were
helpful with agile methodologies – self-organization, and enthusiasm. Self-organizing
32
teams is a core concept of many agile project management methodologies. This concept
refers to the project manager role becoming more hands-off - letting the team do more
themselves while the project manager handles things like budget, communication, and
items which the project team may view as “administrivia”. Enthusiasm refers to an ability
to motivate the project team to be fully invested in the endeavor and enthused on what
needs to be done.
Conversely, the interviewees provided some notions of what skills they needed to
change for success with agile methodologies. One respondent described having “to
practice … not having an opinion”. By not having an opinion on what the team was
working through, they stated that this let them be more hands off while the team was self-
organizing, as is dictated in Scrum teams.
4.2.2 Additional Interview Findings
To close the interview, the respondents were asked their opinion on two
additional questions. First, each were asked if they found project success defined
differently if using traditional versus agile methodologies. One interviewee discussed
how “success criteria you set is set by stakeholder.” While this is true of both
methodologies, agile allows you to change requirements throughout moreso than with
traditional methodologies. The team is able to start with an idea of what is wanted and
“incrementally build towards that end product.” This ties into what was described by the
other interviewee. They talked about how agile allows for more critical components of
the end-product to be delivered much quicker. The customer is able to then “feel like
they actually got something.” The remaining functionality of the product can then be
built out in future iterations.
Finally, respondents were asked if their training was sufficient or if they felt like
they could have used more on their path to agile project management. One respondent
felt that although more agile training would have been useful, it would have been most
effective if it was for the entire organization and not just for those in project management.
This aligns with most texts – that agile must be an organization-wide mindset embedded
into their culture to be most effective. The other respondent felt that they were
33
sufficiently trained both through on the job learning, as well as having obtained a PMP
and becoming a Certified Scrum Master.
4.3 Comparisons of Certifications
As an additional method of data to look at skills recommended versus project
management methodologies, the researcher reviewed certification material for the PMP
(Project Management Professional) and CSM (Certified Scrum Master) certifications.
The majority of survey respondents indicated they held a-PMP certification. Of those
who specified agile certifications held, the CSM stood out as the prominent agile
certification.
As the survey was distributed to PMI chapters, the researcher was surprised to
find that no respondents indicated they held the PMI-ACP (Project Management Institute
– Agile Certified Practitioner) certification. This certification has existed since 2011 and
in 2015 was last updated. The PMI-ACP also does not focus on just one agile
methodology, as the CSM does, but rather introduces several agile methodologies
including Scrum, Kanban, and others. Despite this breadth of Agile methodologies
covered in the PMI-ACP, CSM still stood out. This does, however, align with findings
discussed earlier from VersionOne (2015) which stated that 56% of respondents were
using Scrum as their agile methodology.
As the PMP and CSM were determined to be the two most popular certifications
among respondents, the next step was to analyze documentation for each. By analyzing
such documents, further insights may be gained into potential differences in skills and
competencies recommended, if such differences do exist.
Representing the PMP certification, the PMBOK v5 was selected as the document
of choice. As discussed earlier in this work, the PMBOK is the de facto guide to the
PMP and is regularly updated by PMI to reflect changes in the field. While reviewing the
PMBOK, there were hints found which tied back to the PMCD (Project Manager
Competency Development) Framework.
The PMBOK lists competencies and skills which are deemed important to the
PMP certification and project management field in general. In regards to competencies,
the PMBOK simply mentions the three overarching competencies contained in the
34
PMCD: knowledge, performance, and personal. However, as was found by analyzing the
PMCD, these three competencies contain a vast range of individual skills and associated
metrics.
The PMBOK further discusses several interpersonal skills which PMI has found
to be most relevant to making a project manager effective. In total, eleven skills were
listed and described in the PMBOK including leadership, team building, motivation,
communication, influencing, decision making, political and cultural awareness,
negotiation, trust building, conflict management, and coaching. However, of these eleven
skills, it is important to compare them against the results of the survey LDQ and PMCD
sections. The LDQ found that traditional project managers had slightly higher scores
related to critical analysis and judgement, strategic perspective, vision and imagination,
and resource management. These seem to most closely correlate to the leadership and
decision making skills identified by PMI for inclusion in the PMBOK. Looking at the
PMCD, there were no metrics in this survey component in which the traditional
respondents held a higher score than respondents who held agile certifications.
The CSM, however, required two documents to provide more insight into
recommendations for how a CSM should function. Many books have been written about
Scrum and how to implement it, but apart from a short 17-page guide aptly titled “The
Scrum Guide”, there was no comparable text such as the PMBOK found for Scrum. To
complement “The Scrum Guide” (Sutherland & Schwaber, 2013), the text “Essential
Scrum: A Practical Guide to the Most Popular Agile Process” (Rubin, 2012) was selected
to gain more information into what makes a Scrum Master.
Unlike the PMBOK, the two documents chosen to represent CSM did not
explicitly list out optimal competencies and skills. However, Rubin did list several
responsibilities of the Scrum Master in the “Essential Scrum” text. These include being a
coach, a servant leader, being a process authority and interference shield, and being an
impediment remover and change agent. Furthermore, Rubin described several
characteristics or skills important to a Scrum Master. These characteristics include being
knowledgeable, questioning, patient, collaborative, protective, and transparent. The skills
required for these responsibilities are about as diverse as those required for proper
implementation of the PMBOK.
35
The survey results had found that respondents with agile certifications scored
higher on the PMCD section for three main components. On the “Communicating
dimensions”, actively listening, understanding, and responding to stakeholders, and
maintaining lines of communication were found to be more important. Additionally, the
managing component of resolving conflict involving the project team or stakeholders was
rated higher among respondents with agile certifications. These three items correlate
most closely to the Scrum Master responsibilities of being an impediment remover, and
being an interference shield. These two roles help protect the team against a variety of
items which can be detrimental to the team’s workflow. This can include managing
disputes, answering questions from outside sources, and removing barriers to success for
the Scrum team.
Comparing the documentation for both certifications, similarities and differences
are both found. The terms used in the PMBOK are more explicit while the terms used by
Rubin are less specific and can include multiple skills. Regardless, both include
important skills such as leadership, communication, influencing, and negotiation. With
CSM, the terms used are changed, yet are similar. As an example, the PMBOK describes
influencing, while this could be described as questioning with CSM.
The skills listed by the PMBOK are all more closely related to that of someone
who is in a role which has a team under them that they are providing guidance to the team
by providing direct leadership and guidance on what the team should be doing at what
time and with what output. Conversely, the skills and characteristics of Scrum are all
centered around bringing the team closer together while helping remove their barriers to
success and providing small suggestions to help coax new ideas out of the team to enable
them to solve issues themselves where appropriate. To summarize, the CSM and
PMBOK skills are similar. However, a CSM implements these skills in a manner which
provides less interference to the team.
4.4 Final Conclusion
The research conducted targeted three different data sources. The survey data
gained insights into the project management field from a diverse range of individuals
from a wide geographical region of the United States. The follow-up interviews, while
36
small in quantity, were able to provide more specific insights from two survey
respondents. Finally, the documentation analysis for two methodologies looked into
what was recommended for skills for both Scrum and the PMP. Through these three data
sources, triangulation can be obtained.
The survey data shows us interesting demographic information for the
respondents including age, company sector, IT project management experience, and
certifications held. As well, interesting results related to how process success is defined
from two different viewpoints were found. Despite the research showing that agile
project managers do have higher scores on the PMCD components of Communication
(C1, C2) and Conflict Resolution (M3), the related components of the LDQ Engaging
Communication (MQ2) and Empowering (MQ3) yielded nearly identical scores between
respondents who held traditional versus agile certifications. Only the related LDQ
component of Developing (MQ4) showed a higher score for respondents with agile
certifications than those with traditional certifications.
The individual interviews and documentation analysis also yielded interesting
results and insights. Both showed certain skills listed, however the interviews did not
show any substantial differences between respondents. Both interviewees focused more
on how the goal of agile was to provide more autonomy to the team. This is echoed in
the document analysis.
In conclusion, while components of the research, specifically in the survey data,
do show agile and traditional project management certification holders having higher
scores in different skill sets, conflicting results are shown in other data points. As such,
this research concludes by determining that there is no significant set of skills which are
more preferred over another for project managers regardless of which project
management methodology is being used. However, all respondents except one who held
agile certifications also held the PMP. Therefore, it is recommended to obtain the PMP
certification and supplement the PMP with a relevant agile-related certification, whether
that is CSM, PMI-ACP, or one more relevant to the methodology in use by the target
organization.
37
4.5 Future Research
The researcher would like to see this research to be expanded in several ways.
First, the questions relating to how project success is rated by the customer versus the
triple constraint, or Iron Triangle, provided interesting results that could be explored
further. Specifically, what factors contributed to the difference in defined project
success? An additional point in which the research could be expanded would be in the
survey audience. As the number of respondents who held agile certifications was quite
low, it would be interesting to see if the results change if the survey was instead
distributed to respondents who were more focused on an agile methodology – such as
groups of Certified Scrum Masters.
52
APPENDIX B. ONE-ON-ONE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
Think back on projects you have worked on in the past.
Thinking about the projects which utilized a traditional project management
methodology:
1. Which of your personal skills help the most to achieve a project success?
2. Were any personal skills not as useful on these types of projects?
3. Were the clients/users satisfied with the outcome of the project?
4. Do you encounter any barriers to success which impede your ability to apply your
personal skills on traditional project management methodologies (such as
waterfall)?
Now thinking about the projects which utilized an agile project management
methodology:
1. Which of your personal skills help the most to achieve a project success?
2. Were any personal skills not as useful on these types of projects?
3. Where the clients/users satisfied with the outcome of the project?
4. Do you encounter any barriers to success which impede your ability to apply your
personal skills on agile project management methodologies (such as SCRUM)?
Now think about comparing yourself in managing traditional versus agile project
management methodologies:
1. Do you find project success defined differently if utilizing traditional versus agile
project management methodologies? If yes, please provide examples.
2. Did you have to change or improve specific personal skills to manage one type of
methodology versus the other?
3. Would additional training have helped you better adapt your skills to execute an
agile project management methodology versus a traditional methodology such as
waterfall? If yes, do you have specific training you believe could have helped?
Thank you for your participation in this study. A report of the findings of this study will
be provided to you, if requested, once the data collection and analysis has completed.
53
REFERENCES
Beck, K., Beedle, M., van Bennekum, A., Cockburn, A., Cunningham, W., Fowler, M.,
… Thomas, D. (2001). Manifesto for Agile Software Development. Retrieved
from http://agilemanifesto.org
Boehm, B. W., & Turner, R. (2004). Balancing agility and discipline: a guide for the
perplexed. Boston: Addison-Wesley.
Brewer, J. L., & Dittman, K. C. (2010). Methods of IT Project Management (1st ed.).
Pearson Prentice Hall.
Chickering, J. (2013, April 22). Agile and project managers. Retrieved September 20,
2014, from http://www.pmi.org/learning/agile-project-managers-tough-questions-
5782?id=5782
Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M. (2005). Assessing leadership styles and organisational
context. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20(2), 105–123.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940510579759
El-Sabaa, S. (2001). The skills and career path of an effective project manager.
International Journal of Project Management, 19(1), 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(99)00034-4
Fisher, E. (2011). What practitioners consider to be the skills and behaviours of an
effective people project manager. International Journal of Project Management,
29(8), 994–1002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.09.002
54
Geoghegan, L., & Dulewicz, V. (2008). Do project managers’ leadership competencies
contribute to project success? Project Management Journal, 39(4), 58–67.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.20084
Gillard, S. (2009). Soft skills and technical expertise of effective project managers. Issues
in Informing Science and Information Technology, 6(2009), 723–729.
Keil, M., Lee, H. K., & Deng, T. (2013). Understanding the most critical skills for
managing IT projects: A Delphi study of IT project managers. Information &
Management, 50(7), 398–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2013.05.005
Kerzner, H. (2013). Project management: A systems approach to planning, scheduling,
and controlling (Eleventh edition). Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.
Müller, R., & Turner, R. (2010). Leadership competency profiles of successful project
managers. International Journal of Project Management, 28(5), 437–448.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.09.003
Project Management Institute (Ed.). (2007). Project manager competency development
(PMCD) framework (2. ed). Newton Square, Pa: Project Management Institute.
Project Management Institute. (2013). A Guide to the Project Management Body of
Knowledge (5th ed.). Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
Royce, W. W. (1987). Managing the Development of Large Software Systems: Concepts
and Techniques. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Software
Engineering (pp. 328–338). Los Alamitos, CA, USA: IEEE Computer Society
Press. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=41765.41801
55
Rubin, K. S. (2012). Essential Scrum: a practical guide to the most popular agile
process. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley.
Sutherland, J., & Schwaber, K. (2013, July). The Scrum Guide. ScrumGuides.org.
Retrieved from http://www.scrumguides.org/docs/scrumguide/v1/Scrum-Guide-
US.pdf
Takeuchi, H., & Nonaka, I. (1986). The new new product development game. Harvard
Business Review, 64(1), 137–146.
VersionOne, Inc. (2010). 5th Annual State of Agile Survey. VersionOne, Inc. Retrieved
from http://www.versionone.com/pdf/2010-state-of-agile-survey.pdf
VersionOne, Inc. (2015, March 26). 9th Annual State of Agile Survey. VersionOne, Inc.
Retrieved from http://www.versionone.com/pdf/state-of-agile-development-
survey-ninth.pdf
Wysocki, R. K. (2013). Effective Project Management: Traditional, Agile, Extreme (7
edition). Indianapolis, IN: Wiley.